Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Offers A Modified Settlement
inepom01 writes: "Just read a story here about Microsoft offering a different settlement proposal- this one would have two other companies join in on the foundation MS is establishing- Connectix and Key Curriculum Press. Since Connectix makes software that lets Windows programs work on Macs, seems like same old Microsoft tricks." gnovos points to another story at MSNBC on the shifting terms of this proposal.
Instead of the normal round of complaints, sometimes insightful comments, and mostly junivile comments, why not get involved and subimt something.
Information on the United States v. Microsoft Setlement
The Tunney Act sets forth procedures that must be followed whenever the United States proposes to settle a civil antitrust suit through entry of a consent decree. Pursuant to the Tunney Act, members of the public have an opportunity to comment on the proposed settlement before it is accepted by the court.
There, all the linkage you need.
I'm going to go back in my box and will think within the limits of my box: MS Sucks Linux Good I read too much Slashdot.
Microsoft proposes changes
December 10, 2001: 12:51 p.m. ET
Software maker seeks to modify private settlement to deflect criticism.
Microsoft Corp. is offering to modify the proposed settlement of private antitrust lawsuits to deflect criticism it would simply extend its software monopoly by donating reduced-priced software, computers and training to schools.
This concerns a private class-action suit which may or may not have merit, NOT the DOJ sellout. Pay attention people!
sulli
RTFJ.
that means she gets less than five CENTS an hour to teach a child. [per child of course]
Even with overcrowded classrooms, that would work out to at most $2 an hour, which can't be accurate. Your earlier $1 per child per day figure would work out to (using the most unrealistic timesheets) no more than $6 an hour, again not accurate. I worry that people will pay too much attention to your clearly invalid numbers and ignore your (quite correct) points.
My father teaches high school in one of the most underfunded states in the union... with years of experience, he makes over $30K a year before taxes, or around $15 an hour. It's not babysitter wages, but it's still quite a small amount if you expect to be able to hire people more competent than babysitters. It's less than he made in either of his two previous careers (not even considering inflation), and it's half of what many of my friends make straight out of college. Every teacher working in America's public schools is doing so either because they gave up much more lucrative job opportunities out of some sense of altruism or because they really can't find a better job. I'm cynical enough to be surprised that the first group isn't extremely rare, but the second group is still adequately represented.
I agree that teachers are underpaid, but it's important to understand why: the reason isn't some abstract ideal of fairness.
Ideally, we'd be paying teachers enough to make it a financially competitive job, and using the influx of new applicants to actually fire the least competent current teachers regularly. Isn't that what you do when hiring for any other job, make sure you're paying enough to have a full applicant pool to choose from? The current methods for avoiding incompetent teachers generally involve making them jump through years of easy "how to teach" classes and certification hoops, and I suspect for every illiterate they weed out there's at least one scientist they scare off.
bullshit. Name 5 executives who were sentenced to jail time for violating antitrust laws.
How about 50? Though that's only from 1999-2000. Here's it broken down over the past decade by number of convictions and time spent in jail.
A little hasty, weren't we.